If and when Mazda comes out with the RX9 it will be challenge
    installing it in an airplane. Here are some 3D's I did. This is the
    Big GT40 TC we used on the time to climb. Should be about 900 HP.
    Enough to win at Reno.

    It will get a lot easier if you move the engine 4 or 5 inches
    further forward.  You might have to add a P51 style strake ahead of
    the rudder to restore the direction stability. Our pilot has not
    mentioned a directionally stability problem yet with the TTC.

    Everything after RX9-15 is 5 inches forward.

    This is just rough at this point and I will do another exhaust
    manifold to make it easier o get the motor mount tubes in there.

    Paul Lamar

   Paul,
   This is a what if kind of question. The design and dimensions of the RX9 engine is all there. Someone like Promaz in Australia ( Promaz.com.au <http://Promaz.com.au> ) could make the housings, plates and rotors. Designed for any accessories and water pump. Injector placement etc.
   why I'm asking? Efficiency every ounce possible turbo compound clutched supercharger etc on pump gas. Maybe 3 rotor?
   been thinking about a 400kt Carbon fiber plane forever and a day. Design has made leaps and bounds over the last few years but power plants are still lacking efficiency wise. Any reliability is out the window with piston engines at that speed. Or the weight and complexity makes it a no go.
   Estimate around 20k for block and crank maybe less if their interested in the project.

   Kurt Emerson


   Paul,
   This is a what if kind of question. The design and dimensions of the RX9 engine is all there. Someone like Promaz in Australia ( Promaz.com.au <http://Promaz.com.au> ) could make the housings, plates and rotors. Designed for any accessories and water pump. Injector placement etc.
   why I'm asking? Efficiency every ounce possible turbo compound clutched supercharger etc on pump gas. Maybe 3 rotor?

   been thinking about a 400kt Carbon fiber plane forever and a day. Design has made leaps and bounds over the last few years but power plants are still lacking efficiency wise. Any reliability is out the window with piston engines at that speed. Or the weight and complexity makes it a no go.
   Estimate around 20k for block and crank maybe less if their interested in the project.

   Kurt Emerson

   Well it would not be wise to make the parts for e-shaft, rotor and rotor housings. These are tried
   and true with thousands of hours. The end and center housings for the RX8 is another matter.
   Since the RX9 is all aluminum even these parts will not have to be made.

   The speed is going to be a function of the frontal area of the craft. That in turn will
   be a function of how many passengers you would like to carry. One pilot and one
   passenger can be accommodated in a semi reclining position with the lowest possible
   frontal area.

   My guess is a 3 rotor turbo would be wise at about 1000 HP for 400 MPH. It would need an intercooler
   and perhaps water injection for take off.  Running on gasoline. The turbo compound part would take a lot
   of R&D. It took us a year to get the TTC working well. We learned a lot so another
   identical craft would take 1/4 of the time. With a cowling my guess is we could
   go well over 300 MPH with the TTC and with a different prop..

   So far nobody has built a small turbo compound aircraft engine let alone a Wankel
   version.

   The CW radial turbo compound was 3350 cubic inches.

   Paul Lamar


   A while ago, Paul was talking about attaching a small drive shaft to the turbo compressor end and driving a gear reduction box. The output of that could drive another pulley on a serpentine belt.

   The Glassair fuselage is reinforced with carbon fiber matting behind the cabin for additional strength.

   Rotary displacement calculation formula: 3square root x 3 x e x R x width/1000. This gives displacement in cc per rotor face. Mazda uses one face per rotor to get lower road tax. A larger engine gets taxed more. So Mazda is calculating on one eshaft rotation. The engines are 4 stroke cycle so most race sanctioning bodies double the Mazda displacement claim. So for example of a 13B:
   3 x squre root of 3 x (e) 15mm x (R) 105mm x width 80mm/1000 = 654.7 cc.


   Mazda produced a JDM rotary for front wheel drive noted as 13A. The internal dimensions were e 17.5, R 120mm, width 60mm. Plug the numbers in and you get 654.7cc. Now if you used the same eshaft, gears and radius dimensions but widen the rotors to 70mm you get 763.8cc.


   105mm/15mm is a 7:1 ratio used in all Mazda production engines other than the 13A. It had a ratio of 120/17.5 = 6.857:1. If you syrtch the radius a bit to 125mm you would get 7.1429:1. Both are very close to the 7:1 used in most Mazda production engines. If you used the eshaft and gears from a 13A with rotors with a radius of 125mm and 70mm width the displacement becomes 795.66cc. Very close to what Mazda would call a 16X. The rest of the world would call it a 3.2L engine.



   Turbo RX8 are about 450HP unless you push the boost and tune. The displacement increase from 2.616L to 3.183L should eqate to about 547HP. If the power recovery gives 25% power increase because no valves the power should be close to 685 HP. This is fairly mild. With higher boost, 1000HP should be easy. The Sport Class Glassair 3's are over 400MPH with less power and I doubt you would blow an engine.

   The TTC engine based on the larger displacement could be 650 HP x 1.217 for the displacement increase = 790HP. With power recovery; x 1.25 = 990HP.

   Dale Davies




   The Rotary Engine free News Letter. Powered by Linux. If you want off
   the list PLEASE let me know and I will remove  you.  ACRE NL web
   site. http://www.rotaryeng.net You Tube http://tinyurl.com/beqqxas
   Copyright 1998-2017 All world wide rights reserved.